Martone v. State

959 So. 2d 1240, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 9968, 2007 WL 1827247
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Martone v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 922 So. 2d 404
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 27, 2007·No. No. 4D05-4064·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Thomas Martone appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The sole issue before the trial court at the evidentiary hearing on the motion was whether Martone’s trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by failing to properly advise him of the consequences of declining a lenient plea offer allegedly made by the state. The trial court denied the njotion based on the court’s finding that the state had not made any plea offers. The prosecutor unequivocally testified that he had not made a plea offer. Thus, although the evidence was conflicting, this court must defer to the trial court’s factual finding on this point, as it was supported by competent substantial evidence. See Stephens v. State, 748 So.2d 1028, 1033-34 (Fla.1999).

Affirmed.

WARNER, KLEIN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Martone v. State, 959 So. 2d 1240, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 9968, 2007 WL 1827247 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

959 So. 2d 1240 (Martone v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stephens v. State
748 So. 2d 1028 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)